1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Future salary cap situation

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by captainWIMM, Apr 12, 2014.

  1. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    I expect him to get even more money than Jennings got. With the cap number going up players and agents will ask for more money as well.
     
  2. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    Just because it's bigger contract doesn't mean it will be a bigger cap hit.

    I still expect him to be resigned based on TT's tendency to resign guys and the much less depth behind Jordy compared to what was behind Jennings.


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  3. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    You realize that the total cap hit of a player´s contract over the entire length equals the money the player actually got during the contract, don´t you???
     
  4. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    Percentages. $45 million now is less of a cap it than it was a when Jennings was signed.


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  5. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    I don't get why some people keep saying this about poor receiving depth. Randall Cobb and Jordy are top tier receivers. Jarrett Boykin looks every bit the part to me. (And I suspect the Packers coaches feel the same given that they allowed JJ to walk.) I gotta tell ya... there are about 25 teams in the NFL that would kill to have our receivers. I agree however that we should grab one early if available. Having said that, I'm thinking Ted may have his eye on some free agents. There's no question guys would love to have Rodgers throwing them the ball so we could probably snag one at a decent price.

    Look at it this way. Driver really has been a non-factor for the past 2 seasons. People keep listing him as some sort of legit back-up and that's just not reality. So, if we consider Jordy and Cobb as studs, then all we're really debating is the difference from last year to this year is the difference between JJ and Boykin. (and I'm fine to roll with Boykin there) As far as I'm concerned, we have fantastic and proven players at #1 and #2... I would call Boykin and "very good bet" at #3. If they can draft or sign a good player to compliment that group, all of a sudden we're talking about a fantastic set of receivers and it's biz as usual in Green Bay!
     
  6. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    Yeah, but you have to understand that players and agents will ask for the same percentage in contract negotiations, meaning the $ amount in contracts will increase by the same percentage as the cap.
     
  7. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    None of these three is under contract for 2015 though. Doesn´t make that thing with the cap any easier IMO.
     
  8. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,799
    Ratings:
    +2,666
    Please check the definition of "sans". Note its use in the post to which you replied, i.e., "sans Nelson".

    I'll repeat for about the 10th. time: We need to be thinking about drafting a WR because (1) it typically takes at least a year for them to get productive, (2) Nelson's departure should be viewed as a distinct possibility and (3) WR is a core competency; we don't need another position group drifting into mediocrity.
     
  9. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    If the Packers let one of their WRs walk, it will be Cobb, not Nelson. It's really weird that somehow the "30 and over" rule for running backs has been applied to basically every position in the NFL outside of QB. Last year, Andre Johnson (32) was the third leading WR in the NFL. Brandon Marshall is currently 30, Anquan Boldin is 33, Larry Fitzgerald is 30, Vincent Jackson is 31, Marques Colston is 30, Wes Welker is 32...Reggie Wayne was 35 and averaging 72 yards receiving per game before he blew out his knee and he had over 1,300 yards receiving last year at age 34! WRs can play after the age of 30.

    Jarett Boykin could easily become a #2 WR. Look at last year. In 200 fewer snaps than James Jones he had 681 yards receiving vs Jones' total of 817 (and Finley wasn't playing then either). Boykin was a second year player, you can't possibly project that last year was his ceiling, he should continue to improve.

    And I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic about your New England comment but let's remember that New England has gone quite a bit further in the playoffs than the Packers have the last couple seasons. Also let's remember that we have a legit running game now so the team shouldn't need as many high quality receivers since we should hopefully be throwing the ball slightly less.

    We should certainly draft a WR but I'm not sure that you're giving the guys currently on the roster the credit they should probably receive. White should improve, Chris Harper could be very good (4th round pick cut by the Seahawks) and Kevin Dorsey could make the same leap that Boykin did. Yes, WR is a core competency which is why it shouldn't be too much of a worry. Thompson has proven capable of finding wide receivers. Again though, you're not taking into account a better running game which should de-emphasize the passing game to an extent.
     
  10. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,799
    Ratings:
    +2,666
    The issue is not how a 30 year old guy will play when he's 31 or 32. The issue is Pro Bowl caliber players coming up for 3rd. contracts at that age want 5 year deals. The issue is how they will play in the back half of the deal.

    Besides, my point, which I thought was obvious, was not that I expect some immediate Nelson decline. It's that the contracts Nelson and Cobb will command, assuming no injuries, would be excessive for the position group. If a guy needs to go it would be the guy least likely to remain productive through the term of the contract and that would be Nelson.

    It's not that I dislike Nelson as a player, far from it. We'll miss those back shoulder catches and game-changing post plays. But as one poster with a flair for the obvious recently put it, that's the NFL.

    Actually, 30 years old...8 years of pounding...is quite old for a running back. The ones who get big 3rd. contracts include approximately nobody.

    I would have thought the "not" following the New England comment would have been a clue that I do not endorse the New England approach.

    Except for the brief Moss period, the Brady years have not been wideout-centric. On the other hand, the Rodgers offenses have been wideout-centric; one should think the big play might just be in his DNA. I don't believe Rodgers frequent blindness to the open TEs and RBs he bypasses underneath, or that his one technical weakness, touch on screens and dump offs, are some ephemeral accidents that should be "fixed". The history of reloading the wideout core competency (Driver out/Nelson in, Jennings out/Cobb in, Jones out/Boykin in) while being cost effective should continue.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2014
  11. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,245
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    I will not be surprised if the Packers draft a WR in the first three rounds, but I don’t see evidence of a Packers' ‘no signing 30-year old WRs’ rule. This story appeared on jsonline on March 16, 2013:
    http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...on-offer-em96ep8-198638301.html#ixzz2z9kh1sc3

    Of course Jennings was 29 years old when he turned down a multi-year offer to join the Vikings and he was 28 when he turned down a more lucrative multi-year contract, both of which would have made him a Packer into his 30s. Jordy will be 29 next month.

    As much as I like Cobb – and I really like him – I think Jordy is more valuable to the offense. Of course the Packers won’t sign him “at any cost” but I expect them to make a legit offer to keep him. Here’s a quote from a jsonline story from August of 2012 titled, “Packers got Nelson for a steal last year, and he's OK with that”. In response to him being underpaid by NFL standards he said:
    http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/catching-a-break-vk6fi4f-166204736.html#ixzz2z9raJAEK

    I don’t think Jordy will accept a way-below-average offer but I do think it’s possible he will weigh the advantages of staying in Green Bay more than some other players.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    Not necessarily. The Packers let guys hit free agency every year who can't get what they are looking for and then end up resigning.


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  13. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    I guarantee that won't happen to Nelson though.
     
  14. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    Nelson is the kind of WR that should be good well past the age of 34. He's a very good route runner and he doesn't rely overmuch on deep speed...plus he's got a terrific QB that doesn't need massive holes to complete passes. There's no reason that Jordy's deal can't be front loaded. According to Over The Cap the Packers are currently about $22m under the projected 2015 salary cap. A conservative estimate would put the rookie pool that year at $2.0m...That's $20m to work with and fit salaries into.

    The only guys entering free agency in 2015 that, as of right now, I would think the Packers would be interested in keeping at other than minimum deals, would be Nelson, Cobb, Raji, Williams, Bulaga, Sherrod and maybe Tolzein. Of those, I could only see Nelson and Cobb really getting large deals. You could just as easily model Nelson's deal after Mike Wallace if you needed to. Wallace is paid most of his guaranteed money in the first few years and, while Wallace's cap numbers in the final two years are $13.7m each year, the dead money is only $4.4m in 2016 and $2.2m in 2017. If you apply this kind of deal to Nelson then he gets his guaranteed money when he's 30-33 and the team doesn't face much of a hit if he declines after that.

    If you actually look at the potential free agents coming up over the next couple years with some honesty, there aren't really a TON of guys that we have to re-sign. In 2015 you have Nelson, Bulaga (hopefully he plays like he did two years ago), maybe Williams (but cheap), Sherrod (hopefully also cheap and if he shows himself recovered) and then in 2015 you have Daniels, Perry, Worthy (maybe) and Hayward. Right now the team only has $87m spent on the 2016 cap, well below the projected $150m cap for that season. No reason that nelson can't get a substantial amount of his guaranteed money early and alleviate fears of dead money later in his contract.

    The New England analogy still holds. Brady likes big plays as well, the difference is that his team has had a successful running game in the past. We can't just look at recent seasons as the model for the Packers' offense going forward because we haven't had a running game that looked this good since 2009. That year saw Greg Jennings lead the team in receiving yards with 1,113 and Driver just over a 1,000 yards. I'd be perfectly willing to say that a combo of Nelson and Boykin can accomplish that in a couple seasons.
     
  15. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  16. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    G


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  17. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,799
    Ratings:
    +2,666
    If I recall correctly, you said yourself with respect to the alleged Raji $8 mil/year offer that we did not know where the numbers were coming from or what the terms of the offer might have been. I agreed with that and the same applies to the alleged Jennings offer. We don't know if the structure of those offers were such that they were expected to be rejected or if such offers were even made at all.

    Of course there is no rule about not re-signing 30 year old receivers. That is my opinion based on the cap numbers and what the position group cap allocation would look like. I would not be surprised if Nelson would accept a somewhat lower than market offer, but that still remains problematic. "Way below?" Not likely so we agree on that point.

    This discussion is looking a lot like Jennings redux from the middle of the 2012 season. The draft can't come soon enough as far as I'm concerned to reinforce or debunk my hypotheses because the repetition gets tedious.
     
  18. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,245
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    While the numbers are in question IMO it's pretty clear the Packers offered Jennings a multi-year contract in both 2012 and 2013. If offered, he obviously could have accepted it. Whether or not the Packers draft a WR early won't prove anything regarding the re-signing/extension of Nelson.
     
  19. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    The rookie pool for the Packers this year was set at $5.8 million, so your $2 million is way too low. In addition you have to realize that a team will need some extra millions in cap space for guys replacing players put on the PUP list and on injured reserve.

    Boykin will become a free agent after next season as well. I really don´t understand why most of you are thinking the only way to make a huge contract work is backloading the cap hit. IMO it would be way better to structure the contract so that the cap hit wouldn´t increase over the length of the contract by not handing out a signing bonus at all but guaranteeing the first two or three years of base salaries.
     
  20. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    I agree, but if the Packers draft Brandin Cooks for example this could mean they don´t plan on handing out a huge contract to Cobb after next season.
     
  21. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    sorry...I didn't read the 9 other posts...this was the first I saw. 1. agree 2. agree 3 agree
     
  22. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,799
    Ratings:
    +2,666
    I did not say "proof". I said "reinforce a hypothesis". The only "proof" will be when he signs a deal with another team. That should be obvious...practically a tautology.

    I recall no reports of Jennings being offered a contract until the offseason following 2012.
     
  23. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,245
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    There were reports that Jennings turned down an $11M/year contract offer from the Packers and that he was seeking $15M/year in 2012. You can find those reports and/or references to them if you do a search.

    If your hypothesis is Nelson will not be re-signed/extended by the Packers, IMO that is only “reinforced” when Nelson signs with another team. When Thompson used his first pick of the 2008 draft on Nelson, the Packers had no immediate need at the position and it didn’t portend the departure of the three WRs ahead of Nelson in the near future.
     
  24. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    You're looking at the total money earned by the rookies, not what actually counts against cap. Due to which salaries actually count against the cap, the rookies this year should only count about 1.8m. Google packers rookie salary pool, one of the first links is to an Acme Packing Company article discussing it. Over the Cap also talks about it. Our rookie pool is not what actually counts against the cap.

    Not sure you actually read what I was suggesting for Nelson's contract. I said they should build it like Mike Wallace's contract which is heavily FRONT loaded, resulting in very little dead money if he's cut during the last two years.

    Are we really worried about Boykin becoming a free agent? Let's just say that any scenario which sees him getting a large contract would be a TERRIFIC problem to have.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,390
    Ratings:
    +2,819
    This year´s draft picks will count $5.8 million towards the cap during the regular season if all 9 picks make the regular season roster. The number you´re talking about only applies to the offseason, when only the top 51 contracts count against the cap.

    I don´t think you understand the concept of frontloading a deal, that has nothing to do with the dead money releasing a player would result in. It´s about the allocation of the cash actually paid to the player and the cap hit over the length of the contract. The only thing I actually care about is the cap hit a deal accounts for, and in that regard Wallace´s contract isn´t frontloaded at all ($3.25 million cap hit during the first year).

    Well, right now, none of our top three WR is under contract for 2015. If Boykin turns out to be a viable option for the #3 spot (or even the #2 spot as you have suggested) he won´t re-sign for the minimum.
     

Share This Page